Market Intelligence Report: Online Personal Injury (Exec Summary)

UK LEGAL SERVICES ONLINE PERSONAL INJURY

INTELLIGENCE REPORT

March 2012 to March 2013

2

3

FOREWORD

KEY FINDINGS OF THE REPORT

There are over 2,600 law firms in England and Wales involved in Personal Injury (PI) work and the majority of these are small, high street firms. With the introduction of the Jackson Reforms, this will have a major impact on what is still a highly fragmented market. None of the leading volume players in the market have yet been able to carve out a sizeable share of the market – leading players still only take singledigit market shares – but there will be clear opportunities to grow their market share in the new PI market. While claims management brands like National Accident Helpline and Accident Advice Helpline are recognised by a majority of the public, awareness of the leading law firm brands in the PI market is still very low.

We can expect many of the larger law firms involved in PI to use the next year or so to invest in brand development and strive to increase consumer awareness of their brands. As the PI market consolidates, the sector will become a battleground amongst the high volume players with Alternative Business Structure (ABS), more investment in services and new business models (e.g. integrated insurance and legal services companies) all fuelling increasing competition.

David Mort IRN Research

WHAT WILL YOU GET FROM THIS REPORT?

WHAT QUESTIONS DO WE ANSWER?

•

A who’s who in personal injury.

•

•

In-depth market analysis covering March 2012 to March 2013.

Who are the market leaders and which keywords are driving market visibility?

•

What are brands doing to achieve maximum market share?

•

How are brands using social media to acquire customers?

•

Over 100 individual pieces of key insights.

•

Over 100 individual pieces of statistical interpretation.

•

Analysis of the top 100 brands across the top 100 keywords.

•

An interpretation of the top brands search and social media strategies.

TOP INSIGHTS •

With the abolition of referral fees, as part of the introduction of the Jackson Reforms, the search marketing landscape is changing dramatically. In essence, there will be more legal brands competing on search to bring in leads as they will no longer be getting the referrals. Moreover, existing claims management companies have tried to acquire solicitors (and vice versa) to survive. For example, in 2013, Slater and Gordon acquired Simpson Millar, this move follows their acquisition of Russell Jones & Walker in 2012.

•

During 2012 claims management companies started to lose ground to legal service operators and with the introduction of the Jackson Reforms, this trend is set to continue. Where they once collectively accounted for over 54% of the click-share within the market, this has now dropped to 49.28%.

What’s shaping the online personal injury market?

•

Brand search impression volume accounts for over 52% of all search volumes within the personal injury market . However, 48% of the search market is non-brand related, therefore having a strong presence within this area will enable niche operators to compete directly with the larger brands.

•

Over 81% of all brand volume comes from just ten operators: Irwin Mitchell, Pannone, Minster Law, Optima Legal, National Accident Helpline, Accident Advice Helpline, Fentons, InjuryLawyers4U, Claims Direct and Thompsons Law.

•

A macro analysis of the online personal injury market shows us that generic personal injury terms have the largest share of search impression volume with 41.56%. This is followed by road traffic accident with 15.09% and medical negligence with 14.96%.

•

When compared to the period March 2011 to March 2012, search impression volume within the sub-vertical ‘medical negligence’ has increased by 37%. This has made ‘medical negligence’ a more strategically important market for many high profile legal operators.

•

The most important generic keywords are ‘no win no fee’, ‘personal injury claims’ and ‘personal injury solicitors’, accounting for a collective 42.34%.

•

Search impression volume within the personal injury market is also driven by specific location terms. Of the top ten location-based phrases, ‘solicitors London’, ‘solicitors in London’, ‘solicitors in Manchester’ and ‘solicitors Manchester’ accounted for 50.51% of all search impression volume.

•

Accidents and illness at work is one of the main sub-verticals where brands have a wide range of tactical choices, when selecting between short-tail and long-tail keyword phrases.

•

By appearing in the top five for all of the primary volume phrases, Thompsons Law are well positioned to assume leadership within the accidents and illness at work sub-vertical.

•

Simpson Millar have become a key player within the sub-vertical for accidents and illness abroad. Their organic click-share growth can be attributed to their increase in organic rankings for many of the top volume terms.

•

Mack Solicitors is typical of some brands who have experienced a dramatic drop within their organic rankings. It is possible that they may have incurred a Google ranking penalty as their backlink anchor text profile (the text used in hyperlinks to a site) is heavily weighted towards non-brand terms. This may be an indication of an overtly engineered organic linking strategy.

•

Legal brands who have entered our overall organic index include Pannone, Bolt Burdon Kemp and Simpson Millars, while BI Claims, Harris Fowler and Neil Hudgell are new entrants within our paid search index.

•

Moreover, Express Solicitors, Fentons, Claims Direct, First4Lawyers and InjuryLawyers4U have all grown their overall share within the paid search market. For example Express Solicitors have made significant in-roads into the serious injury and mesothelioma subverticals.

•

Accident Advice Helpline has witnessed the most dramatic decline in overall search marketing click-share. During 2012, they dropped six places within our aggregated leaderboard index and have seen a percentage decrease of 15%.

•

Most of the top personal injury brands deploy their marketing across multiple channels, such as National Accident Helpline and Injurylawyers4U have supplemented their online strategy with extensive TV advertising. National Accident Helpline’s top position within our social media score card is underpinned by the cross pollination and integration of their “Under Dog” TV brand campaign with their social assets, giving them the highest engagement score.

•

With a click-share of 18.67%, National Accident Helpline leads our search marketing leaderboard with Irwin Mitchell dropping into second place.

This ranking is underpinned by a leading position within the generic personal injury and accidents and illness sub-verticals, as well as an aggressive PPC strategy in the road traffic accidents market.

•

When compared to 2011, Irwin Mitchell’s PPC activity is less visible and this has clearly contributed to their loss in overall share within the search market.

•

National Accident Helpline leads our social score card with 61 out of 100, which is 10 points ahead of their nearest rivals Pannone and Irwin Mitchell, who have 51 and 50 respectively.

•

Claims Direct (owned by Slater & Gordon UK) have increased their overall click-share within the organic and paid search markets which has allowed them to maintain a solid third position within the aggregated leaderboard.

•

Many personal injury brands have a poor deployment of their social media assets within their websites. In essence, content channels such as blogs, newsrooms, community threads, as well as Facebook and Twitter do not sit at the forefront of their customer journey.

•

While Claims Management Operator 1stClaims leads the organic click-share index for the road traffic accidents sub-vertical, a recent organic ranking fluctuation suggests that their lead is under threat, with their position having dropped in the latter half of 2012, putting National Accident Helpline in a good position to capitalise on this.

•

Social media strategies are massively underdeveloped within the legal services sector. No single operator stands out in terms of best practice when leveraging social media as a means of developing a two way dialogue that stimulates both volume of discussion as well as the quality of engagement.

•

Simpson Millar is one of the fastest growing legal brands within the market and is now in the top 15 on our aggregated search marketing leaderboard index.

•

Pannone has emerged as a key brand within the serious injury sub-vertical, witnessing significant improvements across all the major keyword phrases.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

“WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF THE JACKSON REFORMS, 2013 IS SET TO RADICALLY CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE PERSONAL INJURY MARKET WITHIN THE UK. THE ONLINE PERSONAL INJURY MARKET COVERS A BROAD RANGE OF CLAIMS FOR INJURIES AND ACCIDENTS SUSTAINED AT WORK, IN A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT, PUBLIC PLACES, ON HOLIDAY AS WELL AS CLAIMS ASSOCIATED WITH DISEASES, MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE AND ILL HEALTH IN THE WORKPLACE.”

6

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS STRUCTURES (ABS)

CHANGES TO ‘NO WIN, NO FEE’

In March 2012 the legal services sector witnesssed the launch of Alternative Business Structures (ABS). ABS is a new business structure that enables outside investors to take a share in a legal service business for the first time. Some were predicting a ‘big bang’, opening the door for the likes of banks, utilities and supermarkets to enter the lucrative consumer law market (Sources: UK Legal Services Market report 2011, 3rd Edition, IRN Research, January 2012 and UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March, 2013).

‘No win, no fee’ claims are currently brought under a conditional fee agreement (CFA) with a lawyer, backed by after-the-event (ATE) insurance, which covers the claimant against the risk of having to pay the defendant’s legal costs if they lose the case. Previously the costs that claimants recovered from defendants included a solicitor’s success fee.

Throughout 2012 these big brands have largely been conspicuous by their absence. However, over 100 ABS licences have since been granted with most being a mix of high street firms, volume legal providers, new start-ups and specialist niche law firms (Source: UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March, 2013).

This success fee is calculated as a percentage of the solicitor’s basic fee. It is used to offset the risk of the solicitor not being paid anything, should the claimant lose the case. It is only payable if the claimant wins the case and will usually be paid by the losing opponent. As a result of ATE insurance and the success fee, cases can be bought at no financial risk to the claimant (Source: UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March, 2013).

Of the large consumer law brands that have been granted ABS status, many have been primarily full service law firms. These include Bott & Co, Franklins, Irwin Mitchell, Lyons Davidson, Plexus Law, Russell Jones & Walker (now part of Slater & Gordon), Winkwood Sherwood and Fentons. Law firms such as Irwin Mitchell and Russell Jones & Walker will use ABS, and external investment, to grow their personal injury and other consumer law businesses. (ibid).

Since April of this year, successful claimants will be deprived of up to 25% (capped at this percentage) of their general damages in order to pay solicitor’s success fees and insurance premiums , as these will no longer be recoverable from defendants. The only exception to these changes will be ATE premiums relating to the cost of obtaining expert reports in clinical negligence cases. Regulations will allow all or part of the premium in such cases to be recovered (Source: UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March, 2013).

However, during early 2013 there was news that an ABS licence was issued to communications company BT (Source: BT seeks ABS licence for claims management arm, Legal Futures, February 2012). According to a recent report from IRN Research, “BT Law Ltd will provide legal services to corporate customers, initially in the motor claims market, but with an eye to expanding into other areas of law. BT Law incorporates the existing claims management business BT Claims, which handles more than 35,000 corporate fleet vehicles. BT has announced that it plans to expand into other areas of law over the next year or so but still primarily for corporate clients.” (Source: UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March, 2013). Moreover, IRN go on to state that integrated businesses involving insurance, claims, and legal services are likely to emerge in the coming months, including companies like Admiral, who have set-up joint ventures with both Lyons Davidson and Cordner Lewis. Price Bailey became the first accountancy firm to licence an ABS, trading as Price Bailey Legal Services Ltd. Meanwhile Ageas, a leading motor insurer, announced a five-year partnership with law firm NewLaw to provide services for customers making non-fault personal injury claims after a motor accident (Source: IRN Research - UK Legal Market Trends April 2013).

ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS AND WHIPLASH According to the Ministry of Justice, figures show there has been a 60% rise in personal injury claims associated with road accidents since 2006, despite vehicles becoming safer and a 20% reduction in the number of reported accidents over the same period.

There are estimated to be about 1,500 whiplash claims made in the UK every day, with insurers saying that whiplash claims cost them £2bn a year, equivalent to £90 per vehicle policy (Source: Government plans target cut in bogus car whiplash claims, BBC, December 2012).

This prompted the Ministry of Justice, during the later stages of 2012, to launch a consultation to reduce the number of whiplash claims (Source: Whiplash crackdown, Ministry of Justice, December 2012).

At the centre of this consultation are the following initiatives:

THE JACKSON REFORMS AND REFERRAL FEES

•

Creating new independent medical panels to improve diagnosis of whiplash injuries. This will ensure that genuine claims can still go ahead but exaggerated, misrepresented or fraudulent claims are robustly challenged.

In November 2008, Sir Anthony Clarke, who was then Master of the Rolls, appointed Lord Justice (Sir Rupert) Jackson to conduct a review of legal costs. The purpose of the reform was “to carry out an independent review of the rules and principles governing the costs of civil litigation and to make recommendations in order to promote access to justice at proportionate costs”, (Source: Referral fees in personal injury claims, Standard Note SN/HA/6014, House of Commons, April 2012).

•

Options to allow more whiplash cases to be challenged in the small claims court to change the current position, where it can be cheaper for insurance companies to accept questionable claims than to contest them.

A key element of the reform focused on referral fees which, in essence, cover fees paid by solicitors to claims management companies, BTE (before-the-event) insurance companies and others to “buy” personal injury cases. One of his recommendations was that referral fees in personal injury cases should be banned. Lord Justice Jackson said that the evidence he had received indicated that there was no benefit in competition terms to be gained from allowing referral fees (ibid).

As of April 2013, referral fees have been banned. The rationale behind the ban is that referral fees have contributed to increasing the costs of claims and the aim is also to reduce the number of spurious or less serious claims. It is supported by the insurance industry amidst claims that fewer cases will reduce the premiums paid by the average person for the likes of motor insurance (Source: UK Legal Market Trends, IRN Research March and April, 2013). Many within the industry feel that this will have significant implications for insurers and claims managers who rely on referrals to drive profits. As a result, personal injury firms have become takeover targets, as those with the most to lose from the ban will use the new rules on ownership of legal firms to reinforce their business (ibid). They will be able to develop partnerships with personal injury solicitors, building their own legal capability or acquiring that capability. Moreover, ABS has come at the perfect time for companies needing a legal arm to circumvent the ban. It is therefore unclear how the ban will work in practice if law firms and claims managers are working under the same umbrella. If the April changes are successful they will effectively kill off many areas within the personal injury industry, leaving niche segments like medical negligence and high value injuries as the future battlegrounds (ibid).

This has created an intense debate between solicitors and insurers. Insurers blame the ‘whiplash epidemic’ for driving up the cost of cover for millions of motorists, stating that drivers were exploiting whiplash as ‘the fraud of choice’ or using lawyers to pursue dubious claims to win massive pay-outs. However, lawyers have hit back saying it was the insurers themselves who had a vested interest and that their plans would simply boost their own profits, while limiting the rights of innocent motorists suffering genuine whiplash injuries (Source: Car insurance: MPs to investigate impact of whiplash claims, BBC, March 2013).

“SINCE APRIL 2013, REFERRAL FEES HAVE BEEN BANNED, THIS MOVE WILL RADICALLY RE-SHAPE THE PERSONAL INJURY MARKET.”

8

9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION TO THE ONLINE PERSONAL INJURY MARKET

Figure 1: % Split of search impression volume by sub-vertical

Online personal injury (PI) is made up of a diverse set of keywords that are designed to reflect the different stages within the customer lifecycle. These include brand phrases such as National Accident Helpline and Claims Direct, generic phrases such as ‘personal injury claim’, as well as more market specific terms such as ‘whiplash compensation’ and ‘brain injury’.

In addition, users type location-based phrases to try and find a legal representative near where they live such as ‘personal injury solicitors in London’ and ‘solicitors in Manchester city centre’.

Personal Injury - Generics - 41.56%

Generic terms are typically used to develop search exposure and help initiate the search journey, while the more specific location phrases help drive specificity and the conversion process. Brand typically comes into play during the later stages of the search process when customers have selected the product.

Road Traffic Accident - 15.09%

Medical Negligence - 14.96%

The study covers the period March 2012 to March 2013 and analyses the performance of the leading online personal injury brands across the following sub verticals: •

Generic Personal Injury

•

Road Traffic Accidents

•

Medical Negligence

•

Accidents and Illness At Work

•

Serious Injury

•

Mesothelioma / Asbestosis

•

Accidents And Illness Abroad

Accident and Illness at Work - 12.06%

Serious Injury - 8.64%

Mesothelioma / Asbestosis - 4.19%

ITLG (Holiday Claims) - 3.49%

Source: Google Keyword Estimation Tool

Our findings will detail tactics and strategies, as well as reveal the most visible operators within: •

Organic search

•

PPC (Pay Per Click)

•

Social media

Figure 2: %Split of search impression volume for the top 20 phrases within the online personal injury market

The following insight analyses the top 100 keywords and the top 100 brands within personal injury. We have removed all non-commercial related websites from our statistical interpretations e.g. Wikipedia. % Split 20 15 10

Finding a legal operator with local offices is a key part of the decision making process behind making a personal injury claim. Therefore it is important for brands to maximise search exposure in key towns and cities within the UK. With 25.94% London has the largest share of search impression for location personal injury terms, however this is only marginally ahead of Manchester which has 23.86% (See Appendix A-2).

5

cla ac im cid s en ta tw w or hi k pl as h cla im s he ad in ju in ry ju ry pe la rs w on ye al rs in w hi ju pl ry as cla m h ed im co ica m ln pe eg ns lig at io en n ce co s ol m ici pe to ns rs at io n cla im s

ry ju in

pe

rs

on

al

in

ju

ry

en ce ig

rs

eg l

ln ica

no in w

no

m ed

fe e

so

lic ito

to ici so l

ju in al

rs on

pe

rs on pe

rs

s im ry

ju in

no

w

ry

in

cla

no

fe e

0

al

With 41.56%, the generic personal injury sub-vertical dominates search impression volume within the market, followed by the road traffic accident sub-vertical (15.09%) and medical negligence with 14.96%. When compared to the period March 2011 to March 2012 the search impression volume for the medical negligence sub-vertical has increased by 37% (See Appendix A-1 and UK Legal Services: Online Personal Injury, Stickyeyes, 2012). The top 20 keywords within the market are dominated by generic personal injury terms with ‘no win no fee’, ‘personal injury claims’ and ‘personal injury solicitors’ accounting for a collective 42.34%. Other key terms include ‘medical negligence’ (7.90%) and ‘accident at work’ (5.1%).

Source: Google Keyword Estimation Tool

10

11

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Figure 3: Brand versus non-brand search impression volume

HOW DO WE MEASURE THE SEARCH MARKET? Search impression represents the number of times a website page is displayed within the search results. It is only after the results are displayed that visitors are able to click on either a PPC advert or an organic link. Therefore, “click-share” represents the act of a visitor clicking on a PPC advert or an organic link and is calculated as follows: •

Organic click-share is the number of clicks that an individual operator has achieved against a keyword, as a measure of where they rank for that keyword.

•

PPC click-share is the number of clicks that an individual operator has achieved against a keyword as a percentage of their “Share of Voice” (SOV). SOV is a measure of how often a brand’s PPC ad appears along with its position.

Brand - 52%

Non-Brand - 48%

See Appendix A: Search Impression and Click-Share Methodology for a full breakdown of our methodology.

SHARE OF BRAND SEARCH IMPRESSION VOLUME The personal injury market contains a range of operators:

25 20 15 10 5

om Th

r Ot he

aw ps o

sD m ai Cl

Source: Google Keyword Estimation Tool

ns L

ire ct

U ye rs 4 La w

ry

e lin

Fe nt on s

In ju

Ac cid en

tA dv i

ce

He lp en t

He lp

al aL eg Na

tio

na l

Ac cid

in Ir w

“48% OF SEARCH IMPRESSION VOLUME IS NON-BRAND, ALLOWING NICHE OPERATORS TO COMPETE DIRECTLY WITH THE LARGER BRANDS.”

lin e

0 tim

Most of the top personal injury brands operate across multiple channels, for example: National Accident Helpline and InjuryLawyers4U have supplemented their online strategy with extensive TV advertising (Source: UK Legal Services Market report 2011, 3rd Edition, January 2012, IRN Research). In 2012, Irwin Mitchell embarked on its first TV ad campaign in order to boost brand awareness. A key challenge moving forward is ensuring that offline brand equity is cross-pollinated online via social media channels.

30

M

•

Over 81% of all brand-related searches comes from just ten operators: Irwin Mitchell, Pannone, Minster Law, Optima Legal, National Accident Helpline, Accident Advice Helpline, Fentons, InjuryLawyers4U, Claims Direct and Thompsons Law (See Figure 4).

35

aw

•

% Split

Op

With 32%, Irwin Mitchell has the largest share of brand-related searches within the market. Irwin Mitchell is a full service provider and it is highly likely that their leading brand position is driven in part by volume to its corporate, personal as well as commercial / residential property legal services (See Figure 4). However, Irwin Mitchell is an example of a larger law firm which has been particularly aggressive within the personal injury market. Another example is Australian firm Slater & Gordon, who acquired Russell Jones & Walker, the owners of personal injury specialist brand Claims Direct (Source: Slater & Gordon eyes further UK expansion, Legal Future, February 2013).

er L

•

Figure 4: Brand search impression volume

st

Brand search impression volume accounts for just over 52% of all search volumes . However, 48% of search impression is non-brand related and a strong presence within this area allows niche operators to compete directly with the larger brands (See Figure 3).

in

•

M

Claims Management Operators: Claims management companies specialise in negotiating compensation and then refer the case to a solicitor. However, with the implementation of the Jackson Reforms this type of operator will no longer be able to refer cases and will be forced to re-develop their business model.

ne

•

Source: Google Keyword Estimation Tool

Pa nn o

Full Service Legal Operators: These firms offer a range of legal services that include personal injury, corporate law as well as personal law services such as divorce, probate and wills.

ll

•

he

Specialist Personal Injury Legal Operators: These operators focus mainly on personal injury law, covering everything from road traffic accidents, work related injuries as well as clinical negligence.

itc

•

12

13

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

MOST VISIBLE ONLINE PERSONAL INJURY BRANDS IN SEARCH

Figure 6 b: Organic search leaderboard index 2012 to 2013 Brands

•

•

•

•

•

•

During 2012, claims management companies started to lose ground to legal service operators and, with the introduction of the Jackson Reforms, this trend looks set to continue. Where they once collectively accounted for over 54% of the click-share within the market, this has now dropped to 49.28%.

Many legal services operators have stepped up their aggression within the market and are clearly capitalising on the dramatic changes that are occurring. The biggest turn around has been within the organic search market. In 2011, the organic leaderboard index was dominated by Claims Management Companies (See Figure 6 a, b and c for a full breakdown of our 2012/13 search marketing leaderboard and Appendix A for a breakdown of our 2011/12 search marketing leaderboard). Today, the role is reversed and legal operators have increased their collective click share from 39% to 64% for organic search (See Figure 6 d). This surge is reflective of the growing competition within the market as legal brands seek to maximise exposure within the personal injury market. As can be seen from (Figure 6 c) new entrants into the organic click-share index include Pannone, Bolt Burdon Kemp, Co-operative and Simpson Millar During 2011, Irwin Mitchell was the leading brand across both the organic and paid search market with an aggregated click-share of 21% (Source UK Legal Services: Online Personal Injury, Stickyeyes, February 2012). During 2012, their share of the search market has declined to 18.50% and they now find themselves in second place behind National Accident Helpline.

National Accident Helpline’s aggregated click-share is underpinned by their leading position within the organic sub-verticals for personal injury and accidents and illness. However, it is their aggressive PPC presence across all the primary sub-verticals including generic personal injury and road traffic accidents that has cemented their overall lead. In contrast, Irwin Mitchell’s overall click-share is driven by their organic presence within the sub-verticals for accident and illness at work, holiday claims, medical negligence as well as mesothelioma / asbestosis. When compared to 2011, Irwin Mitchell’s PPC activity has been reduced and this has clearly contributed to their loss in overall share within the search market (See Figure 6 c).

Claims Direct (owned by Slater & Gordon) have increased their overall click-share both within organic and paid search. Brands such as InjuryLawyers4U have a solid paid search performance, however, their organic link strategy is weak, therefore impacting their overall performance. This has allowed them to maintain a solid third position within the aggregated leaderboard. New legal brands entering our organic leaderboard include Pannone, Bolt Burdon Kemp and Simpson Millars, while BI Claims, Harris Follower and Neil Hudgell form some of the new players within our paid search index (See Figure 6 b).

Claims management operator Accident Advice Helpline has witnessed the most dramatic decline in click-share. During 2012, they dropped six places within our aggregated leaderboard and have seen a percentage decrease of 15% within their overall share.

Claims4Free is another claims management operator who have experienced a huge drop in their click-share, pushing them down 12 places (See Figure 6 a, b and c).

Position Change

% Split

Irwin Mitchell



22.54%

National Accident Helpline



14.01%

4

9.94%

Pannone

New Entrant

8.37%

Bolt Burdon Kemp

New Entrant

7.04%

1stClaims

1

6.13%

Thompsons Law

3

5.60%



4.79%

Claims Direct

First Personal Injury Claims4Negligence

3

4.69%

First 4 Lawyers

New Entrant

3.39%

Co-operative

New Entrant

3.00%

Access-Legal (Shoosmiths)

New Entrant

2.69%

Easigo

New Entrant

2.65%

Simpson Millar

New Entrant

2.63%

12

2.56%

Claims4Free

Figure 6 c: Paid search leaderboard index 2012 to 2013 Brands

Position Change

% Split



16.60%

InjuryLawyers4U

2

13.81%

First4Lawyers

5

9.45%

Claims Direct

1

8.71%

Fentons

2

8.41%

National Accident Helpline

Irwin Mitchell

4

7.80%

New Entrant

5.97%



5.04%

3

5.00%

New Entrant

4.77%

2

4.63%

National Claims Helpline

New Entrant

2.73%

BL Claims

New Entrant

2.46%

Harris Fowler

New Entrant

2.38%

Neil Hudgell

New Entrant

2.30%

Accidents Direct Figure 6 a: Search marketing leaderboard index 2012 to 2013 Brands National Accident Helpline

Accident Advice Helpline

Position Change

% Split

1

18.67%

Accident Helpline Spencers Solicitors Express Solicitors

Irwin Mitchell

1

18.50%

Claims Direct



11.37%

InjuryLawyers4U



8.43%

First4Lawyers

5

5.76%

Fentons

3

5.13%

Pannone

New Entrant

5.10%

Bolt Burdon Kemp

New Entrant

4.29%

2

3.74%

Accidents Direct

New Entrant

3.64%

Type of Operator

Thompsons Law

3

3.41%

Accident Advice Helpline

6

3.07%

New Entrant

3.05%

1

2.92%

New Entrant

2.91%

1stClaims

Accident Helpline First Personal Injury Spencers Solicitors

Figure 6 d: Total click-share by channel Paid 2011/12

Organic 2011/12

Paid 2012/13

Organic 2012/13

Legal Service Operators

56%

39%

54%

64%

Claims Management

44%

61%

46%

36%

West One, Wellington Street, Leeds, United Kingdom LS1 1BA T +44 (0)113 391 2929 F +44 (0)113 391 2939 33 Glasshouse Street, London, United Kingdom W1B 5DG T +44 (0)20 300 86501 E hello@stickyeyes.com www.stickyeyes.com @Stickyeyes linkedin.com/company/stickyeyes

Best Agency

Best use of Innovation

Innovation in Online PR